A - Z Renter Preference Trend Survey 2017 informa Canada by Real Estate Forums

A-Z

RENTER PREFERENCE TREND SURVEY

SOURCED FROM THE CANADIAN MULTI-RES TENANT RENTAL SURVEY 2017 DASHBOARD

QUESTIONS ABOUT MULTI-RESIDENTIAL TENANTS? KEY FINDINGS ARE ENCLOSED HERE AND THE REST ARE AVAILABLE ON THE DASHBOARD. THERE ARE LITERALLY MILLIONS OF COMBINATIONS OF QUESTIONS THAT YOU CAN ASK OF THE DASHBOARD, ALLOWING YOU TO DEFINE YOUR IDEAL TENANT AND THEN SEE HOW THEY RESPONDED TO A SURVEY QUESTION.

Interesting findings showcased inside!

T A B L E

O F

C O N T E N T S

A ME N ITIES:

O NL INE:

What do renters find important?

How does online shopping impact behaviour?

BATH ROOM S:

PL ANS:

How many do people have, need, desire?

What changes are respondents making?

COMMU N ICAT I O N S:

Q U IC K FIX:

What is the ideal way to connect to tenants?

Can tenants be convinced to stay with upgrades?

D ECIS ION S:

R ENT ING :

What are deciding factors to sign that lease?

What are the reasons respondents chose to rent?

E L ECTRON I C P R ESE NC E :

SAT ISFACT IO N:

What is the importance of a web site for renters?

How satisfied are respondents with their units?

F E ATU RES :

T EC HNO LO GY:

What are renter preferences?

How do respondents feel about technology?

G RE E N :

U NIV ER SAL :

What eco features are in demand?

How do respondents feel about parking?

HOME :

V IRT UAL :

How do renters find their living situations?

What do tenants think about networking platforms?

IDEAL:

W ELCO M E:

What is the perfect type of housing for respondents?

What are tenants willing to pay more rent for?

J OYRID E :

X XX:

How do tenants get to and from work?

What are the opinions on smoking in 2017?

KE E PSA KES:

6 3

Y U C K!:

Are tenants buying insurance, if not why?

How did pests factor into rentals?

LOCATION :

ZEAL :

What factors into geographic choices?

What are families telling us?

M A IN TE N A NC E :

How happy are tenants with their service requests?

APPENDIX 1 : 201 7 CO M PR EHENSIV E Q U EST IO N L IST

N E TWORK:

How do respondents see the new sharing economy?

DASHBOAR D DETAIL S, COST AND CO NTACT

M E T H O D O L O G Y

The Canadian Apartment Investment Conference brings together owners, managers, developers, investors and lenders to provide valuable insights into the multi-unit residential market.

The 14th annual conference in 2017 attracted over 750 attendees interested in learning about major trends, issues, opportunities, and strategies in Canada’s multi-unit residential market. The conference program is shaped based on an advisory panel of industry leaders. Each year, 20+ senior executives in the multi-family sector gather to advise, consult and educate the producers of the conference on the major trends, opportunities and challenges that are facing the market. In 2016, the advisory panel strongly recommended showcasing tenant preferences at the conference. The producers of the conference looked across the Canadian market and could not find a clear deliverable that focused on tenant preferences, trends and desires. As such, the Canadian Multi-Res Tenant Rental Survey was developed. In the inaugural year, 2016, we produced, distributed and analyzed a survey which resulted in just under 2,000 responses. The data was used to power a keynote presentation at the conference and was distribute to key partners via an Excel dashboard. In 2017, we saw a substantial increase in response rate and depth of survey. Presenting sponsor Yardi and industry gold sponsors contributed to the development and distribution of the survey. In addition to a wide range of social media and

relationship streams for distribution, our partner landlord, owners and managers directly distributed the survey to their tenants via email, poster and notice. Bentall Kennedy, CAPREIT, COGIR, Greenrock, GWL Realty Advisors, Homestead, realstar and Vertica were all instrumental in establishing key survey questions and in distribution to their tenants. Some 10,000 respondents started the survey with some 7,800 completing it, providing a broad range of responses across the industry, country and sector. In 2017, questions focused on preferences, amenities, lifestyle choices, technology and operations. Once the results were in, we tabulated them based on income, age, position in life, dependents, etc. The information was then cross referenced to enable in-depth findings. A detailed dataset was produced that is both dynamic and easy to filter thereby providing custom reports based on market and demographic criteria. This publication is based on analysis from the digital dashboard. Further, more micro and broader analysis is available with access to the dashboard. Should you wish to discuss this publication or dashboard access please contact: Sarah Segal, Director, Informa Canada sarah.segal@informa.com

R E S P O N D E N T S THE MAKEUP OF DATA GROUP

GE N D E R I N CA N A DA

HOW MA NY P EOP LE LI V E IN YO UR H O US E H O L D?

WHAT I S YOU R LI VI NG A RRA NG E ME NT ?

AG ES I N CANADA

24. 5%

Single Living Alone

34.4%

44.7%

Living With Spouse/Partner

33.1%

Myself Only

34.1%

Living With Spouse/Partner With Children

13.4%

12.1%

Living With Roomates

11.5%

6.6%

Single With Children

6.0%

2.0%

Living With Elderly Dependents

1.2%

0.5%

Living In Student Residence

0.3%

1 9.7% 56%

44%

FEMALE

MALE

1 6. 2 % 1 2. 5%

11% 9.4%

18-25

26-30

31-40

WH AT C I T Y D O YOU L I V E I N?

41-50

51-60

61-70

D O YOU HAVE ROOMMAT ES T HAT YOU S HA RE RE NT WI T H?

71-80

1 .5%

81-90

0.2%

91+

PETS

S HA RE RE NT WI T H ROOMMAT ES

TOP 3 CI T I ES FOR RE NT S HA RI NG

M OST F UL L T IM E ST UDE N TS

1 8%

VICTORIA O T TAWA H A L I FA X

50%

33% Toronto 22% Other 9% Calgary 8% Ottawa 6% Halifax 5% Edmonton 5% Vancouver 4% London 4% Brampton 4% Hamilton

36%

43%

ARE PET

I F YOU HAVE ROOMMAT ES,

OW NERS

HOW MA NY D E P E ND E NTS D O YOU HAV E ?

HOW MA NY ROOMMAT ES

OTHER

D O YOU HAVE ?

75.2% 72.5%

WH AT I S YOUR M A RI TAL STATU S?

15. 3%

HOUSEHOL D INCOME, PAST 5 YRS

14.4% MARRIED + COMMON L AW C O M B I N E D

44%

INCREASED

53%

SINGLE

43%

REMAINED THE SAME

30%

MARRIED

29%

DECREASED

3.9%

1 7%

Vancouver, Mississauga and Edmonton had the largest gains. Victoria, Oakville, Calgary and Kingston saw the largest decreases.

H AV E YOU PREVI OUS LY OWNED A HO ME?

NO Y ES

68% 31% CA N ADA

82 % 1 8% UNDER 55

23% 77% OVER 55

8.9 %

5. 6%

2 .9%

0.9%

0.2 %

0.1%

I F YOU HAVE D E P E ND E NT (S), WHAT A RE T HE I R AG E G ROU PS?

5-9

14.8%

31-35

5.3%

66-70

1.4%

10-15

12.8%

36-40

3.8%

76-80

0.9%

15-20

11.6%

41-45

2.0%

71-75

0.9%

0-2

11.7%

46-50

2.0%

81-85

0.5%

2-4

9.9%

51-55

1.9%

86-90

0.3%

21-25

8.8%

56-60

1.8%

91-95

0.2%

26-30

7.2%

61-65

1.9%

95+

0.0%

36%

<$50K

32.2%

44%

54%

$50K-$80K

25.9%

UNDER 55 HAVE 2 BEDROOMS

OVER 55 HAVE 2 BEDROOMS

Prefer Not To Disclose

17.6%

$80K-$100K

11.3%

$100K-$150K

9.1%

$150K-$200K

2.5%

18 -30 YE A RS OLD

$250K+

0.8%

$1,201 - $1,500

30.6%

$1,201 - $1,500

17.8%

$1,201 - $1,500

29.8%

$200K-$250K

0.6%

$1,501 - $1,800

25.4%

$1,501 - $1,800

20.5%

$1,501 - $1,800

18.2%

$1,801 - $2,000

11.0%

$1,801 - $2,000

13.5%

$1,801 - $2,000

17.1%

$1,001 - $1,200

11.8%

$1,001 - $1,200

5.8%

$1,001 - $1,200

17.8%

$2,001 - $2,200

3.6%

$2,001 - $2,200

10.3%

$2,001 - $2,200

7.0%

$2,201 - $2,500

3.9%

$2,201 - $2,500

10.6%

$2,201 - $2,500

3.1%

$501 - $1,000

8.6%

$501 - $1,000

3.7%

$501 - $1,000

2.9%

$2,501 - $3,000

2.3%

$2,501 - $3,000

10.4%

$2,501 - $3,000

1.9%

Under $500

1.7%

Under $500

1.2%

Under $500

1.2%

$3,001 - $3,500

0.4%

$3,001 - $3,500

2.9%

$3,001 - $3,500

0.6%

$3,501 - $4,000

0.1%

$3,501 - $4,000

2.7%

$3,501 - $4,000

0.4%

$4,501+

0.6%

$4,501+

0.6%

$4,501+

0.3%

WHAT I S YOUR HOUSEHOL D INCOME RANGE?

OF THE RESPONDENTS WITH DEPENDENTS HAD CHILDREN BETWEEN THE AGES OF

0-9

>$50K

<$50K

WHAT I S YOU R CU RRE NT RE NT ?

INCOME RANGE

H OW M A N Y CA RS/M OTO R CYC LES DO YO U CU R R ENTLY OW N? CA N A DA W I D E

NO CAR S

1 Car

51.2%

Do Not Own A Car

37.9%

1 CAR

Cambridge/Kitchener/Waterloo

29.3%

Halifax

Cambridge/Kitchener/Waterloo

40.8%

54.5%

Halifax

49.4%

2 Cars

9.7%

Hamilton/Burlington

22.1%

Hamilton/Burlington

63.5%

3 Cars

1.0%

Kingston

26.2%

Kingston

65.1%

4 Cars

0.2%

2 CA R S

Ottawa

46.9%

Ottawa

46.9%

Toronto

50.8%

Toronto

42.8%

Vancouver

47.8%

Vancouver

43.3%

3 CAR S

Cambridge/Kitchener/Waterloo

15.7%

Cambridge/Kitchener/Waterloo

0.5%

Halifax

0.7%

Halifax

8.4%

Halifax

0.7%

Hamilton/Burlington

0.3%

Hamilton/Burlington

12.4%

Hamilton/Burlington

1.8%

Ottawa

0.2%

8.1%

Kingston

0.6%

Ottawa

5.8%

Ottawa

0.2%

Toronto

5.8%

Toronto

0.6%

Vancouver

7.8%

Vancouver

1.3%

CA NA DA WI DE

SECO N DA RY M A R K E TS

61 %

51 %

28.4% 16.4%

20%

1.1% 0.8% Under $500

URBAN MARK E TS

6.3% 4.8%

$501 $1,000

11.4% 5%

$1,001 $1,200

RES P OND E NTS RE NT E D?

48% 18.7%

1 4%

10 %

1 4%

37.3%

12%

1 CA R

2 CA RS

1 CA R

2 CA RS

1 CAR

2 CARS

1 CAR

2 CAR S

1-3 YEARS < 1 YEAR > 5 YEARS 3-5 YEARS

32%

WH AT K I N D OF RE N TA L DO YO U LI V E I N?

Purpose Built Rental Building

76.7%

Condominium Unit

10.1%

Above Ground Apartment In A House

6.1%

HOW MANY BEDROOMS DO YOU HAVE?

HOW MANY BEDROOMS DO YOU HAVE ?

HOW LONG HAVE

ALL R ESPONDANTS

DEPENDANTS < 20 YEARS

RES P OND E NTS WI T H

44.2%

1 Bedroom

40.7%

2 Bedrooms

57.6%

1 Bedroom

27.5%

Other

2.8%

3 Bedrooms

7.2%

3 Bedrooms

12.3%

House

2.7%

Studio

6.6%

Studio

1.8%

Basement Apartment In A House

1.5%

4+ Bedrooms

1.3%

4+ Bedrooms

9.4% 10.1%

0.7%

36.6% 43.8%

BEDROOMS WERE A MINORITY O F T H E S A M P L E W I T H O N LY

15%

$1,201 $1,500

$1,501 $1,800

$1,801 $2,000

$2,001 $2,200

6.2% 5.6%

4.2% 5.0%

$2,201 $2,500

$2,501 $3,000

1-3 YEARS < 1 YEAR > 5 YEARS 3-5 YEARS

0.8% 1.3%

0.6% 0.8%

0.5% 0.0%

$3,001 $3,500

$3,501 $4,000

$4,501+

< 1 YEAR

Calgary

35.8%

Calgary

46.9%

Cambridge/Kitchener/Waterloo

42.6%

Cambridge/Kitchener/Waterloo

31.6%

Halifax

37.1%

Halifax

43.9%

Hamilton/Burlington

39.5%

Hamilton/Burlington

29%

Kingston

36.4%

Kingston

39.4%

Mississauga

39.1%

Mississauga

22.8%

Oakville

29.9%

Oakville

27.6%

Ottawa

38.5%

Ottawa

32.1%

Toronto

36.1%

Toronto

26.2%

Vancouver

38.4%

Vancouver

32.7%

> 5 YE A RS

D E P E NDA NTS < 10YRS RE NT E D? 2 Bedrooms

5.8% 9.3%

1-3 YE A RS

HOW LONG HAVE

62%

22.6% 31.7% 11.9% 19.3%

10%

S UB URBAN MARKE TS

A L L R ES P O N S ES

TORONTO VS VA NCOU VE R

30%

4 CARS

Kingston

55 YE A RS OLD

3-5 YEARS

Calgary

10.7%

Calgary

6.6%

Cambridge/Kitchener/Waterloo

18.9%

Cambridge/Kitchener/Waterloo

6.8%

Halifax

10%

Halifax

Hamilton/Burlington

20.1%

Hamilton/Burlington

11.4%

Kingston

12.7%

Kingston

11.5%

Mississauga

25%

Mississauga

13.0%

Oakville

24.1%

Oakville

18.4%

Ottawa

17.7%

Ottawa

11.8%

Toronto

23.4%

Toronto

14.4%

Vancouver

14.6%

Vancouver

14.3%

A M E N I T Y

C H O I C E S

WE ASKED RESPONDANTS TO RANK AMENITIES BY: Essential Would Not Rent Without

24 HOUR CONCIERGE ADDITIONAL STORAGE SPACE OUTSIDE OF UNIT SPACE BBQS FOR TENANTS TO USE BIKE SHARING BIKE STORAGE BUILDING EVENTS AND SOCIALS BUSINESS CENTER CAR SHARING COMMON LOUNGE COMMUNITY BBQ/GRILL CONFERENCE ROOMS / MEETING SPACE DAILY, WEEKLY, MONTHLY HOUSEKEEPING DAYCARE IN BUILDING DAYTIME CONCIERGE

C A N A D A

Important

Not Important

DESIGNATED UBER DROP OFF & PICK UP AREA DESIGNATED OUTDOOR DOG AREA DOG GROOMING DOG TREATS IN LOBBY DOG WALKING DOG WASHING STATION DRY CLEANING PICKUP/ DELIVERY ENERGY EFFICIENT LIGHTING ENERGY CERTIFIED BUILDING (LEED, WELL BUILDING STANDARD ETC.) FITNESS CLASSES FITNESS FACILITIES GAMES ROOM

W I D E

INDOOR COMMON AREA OUTDOOR COMMON AREA OUTDOOR PLAYGROUND PARCEL DELIVERY SERVICE PARKING LOT PERSONAL SHOPPING SERVICES PERSONAL TRAINER AVAILABLE TO TENANTS PRIVATE BATHROOM IN COSHARING LIVING SPACE SAUNA/SPA SECURITY GUARD AND/OR SYSTEM TODDLER/FAMILY ROOM TRI-SLOT GARBAGE (COMPOST/RECYCLE/GARBAGE) VALET PARKING

R E S U L T S

TOP 10 AMENITIES Essential Would Not Rent Without

1 PA R K I N G LOT 6 ECO FR I E N D LY

What did renters find essential, important and not important?

2 SECU R I T Y GUA R D A N D/O R SYST E M 7 DA I LY, WE E K LY, M O N T H LY H O U SE K E E PI N G

3 T R I -SLOT GA R BAGE

FI T N ESS FACI L I T I ES

ADDI TO NAL STO RAGE SPACE

PA R CEL D E L I VERY SE RV I CE

ENER GY EFFI CI ENT LI GHT I NG

8 DAY T I M E CO N CI E R GE

TOP 10 AMENITIES

BOTTOM 10 AMENITIES

Essential Would Not Rent Without + Important

Not Important

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10.

PARKING LOT SECURITY GUARD AND/OR SYSTEM TRI-SLOT GARBAGE (COMPOST/RECYCLE/GARBAGE) ENERGY EFFICIENT LIGHTING FITNESS FACILITIES ENERGY CERTIFIED BUILDING (LEED, WELL BUILDING STANDARD ETC.) ADDITIONAL STORAGE SPACE OUTSIDE OF UNIT SPACE PARCEL DELIVERY SERVICE OUTDOOR COMMON AREA ECO-FRIENDLY/GREEN BUILDING FEATURES

BUILDING EVENTS AND SOCIALS BUSINESS CENTER VALET PARKING PERSONAL SHOPPING SERVICES PERSONAL TRAINER AVAILABLE TO TENANTS BIKE SHARING CONFERENCE ROOMS / MEETING SPACE CAR SHARING DOG GROOMING DRY CLEANING PICK-UP/DELIVERY

C A N A D A

W I D E

R E S U L T S

AMENITY

ESSENTIAL

IMPORTANT

N/A

NOT IMPORTANT

Parking Lot

30.3%

51.8%

6.4%

11.4%

Security Guard and/or System

20.3%

51.7%

13.4%

14.7%

Tri-slot Garbage (Compost/Recycle/Garbage)

12.2%

55.8%

13%

19%

Fitness Facilities

11.5%

55.1%

11.9%

21.4%

Additional Storage Space Outside of Unit Space

9.7%

42.2%

18%

30.1%

Daily, Weekly, Monthly Housekeeping

29%

27%

37%

Daytime Concierge

6.1%

29%

28.4%

36.5%

Parcel Delivery Service

6.9%

44.3%

19.2%

29.7%

Energy Efficient Lighting

6.2%

61.2%

11.5%

21%

Energy Certified Building (LEED, Well Building Standard etc.)

6.1%

55.6%

15.3%

23%

24 Hour Concierge

5.1%

26.8%

35.7%

32.4%

Private Bathroom in Co-sharing Living Space

4.7%

22.4%

37%

35.8%

Bike Storage

4.6%

34.1%

20.3%

41.1%

Designated Outdoor Dog Area

3.7%

25.7%

30.3%

40.3%

BBQs for Tenants to Use

3.3%

29.4%

19%

48.3%

Outdoor Common Area

42.5%

15.8%

38.7%

Indoor Common Area

2.3%

36%

18%

43.7%

Outdoor Playground

2.3%

22.4%

26.5%

48.8%

Common Lounge

2.4%

29.7%

16.9%

51.1%

Games Room

2.1%

26.8%

22.7%

48.4%

Sauna/Spa

27%

24.9%

46.1%

Fitness Classes

1.9%

22%

26.2%

49.9%

Community BBQ/Grill

1.9%

26.6%

20.2%

51.3%

Building Events and Socials

1.6%

25.3%

14.6%

58.6%

Conference Rooms / Meeting Space

1.5%

19.3%

24.1%

55.1%

Designated Uber Drop Off & Pick Up Area

1.3%

17.4%

32.2%

49.1%

Personal Shopping Services

1.2%

10%

32.3%

56.5%

Dry Cleaning Pick-up/Delivery

12.5%

33.1%

53.4%

Daycare in Building

11.1%

39.2%

48.7%

Toddler/Family Room

11.4%

37.4%

50.2%

Business Center

0.9%

12.9%

28.4%

57.8%

Car Sharing

13.2%

32.2%

53.6%

Personal Trainer Available to Tenants

0.8%

10%

32.5%

56.7%

Valet Parking

0.8%

37.2%

57%

Bike Sharing

0.8%

10.5%

32.6%

56.1%

Dog Walking

0.8%

9.1%

39.5%

50.6%

Dog Washing Station

0.7%

9.5%

40.4%

49.4%

Dog Treats in Lobby

0.6%

6.3%

40.3%

52.8%

Dog Grooming

0.5%

5.4%

40.6%

53.5%

CH ART FI N D I N GS

IT WAS INTERESTING TO NOTE CHANGES WHEN FILTERED FOR LOCATION, RENTAL AMOUNT, AGE AND FAMILIES. To request a custom report or access to the dashboard that will allow for deeper analysis, please contact us.

R E S U L T S HOW MANY BATHROOMS ARE IN YOUR CURRENT LIVING SITUATION? 1. 2.

The clear majority of respondents (76%) had only one bathroom. When you calculate only those 55+, 61% had one bathroom and 37% had two. Compared to 83% under 30 years old who reported having only one bathroom.

1 BATHROOM

3. 4.

For those with young families under 10 years of age, 73% had one bathroom and 25% had two. Only 2% reported three bathrooms. Those paying over $2,500 in rent reported 24% with one bathroom, 68% with two bathrooms, 7% with three bathrooms.

3 BATHROOMS

Brampton

83.3%

Brampton

1.2%

Calgary

62.4%

Calgary

2.3%

Cambridge/Kitchener/Waterloo

62.1%

Cambridge/Kitchener/Waterloo

0.5%

Halifax

68.7%

Halifax

0.5%

Hamilton/Burlington

70.4%

Hamilton/Burlington

1.2%

Kingston

89.1%

Mississauga

2.2%

Mississauga

76.1%

Oakville

3.4%

Oakville

65.5%

Ottawa

0.7%

Ottawa

87.5%

Toronto

1.2%

Toronto

78.2%

Vancouver

0.5%

Vancouver

84.1% 4+ BATHROOMS

Brampton

0.4%

Brampton

15.1%

Halifax

0.3%

Calgary

35.3%

Hamilton/Burlington

0.3%

Cambridge/Kitchener/Waterloo

37.4%

Mississauga

1.1%

Halifax

30.6%

Ottawa

0.2%

Hamilton/Burlington

28.1%

Toronto

0.2%

Kingston

10.9%

Vancouver

0.5%

Mississauga

20.7%

Oakville

31.0%

Ottawa

11.6%

Toronto

20.5%

Vancouver

14.8%

2 BATHROOMS

TO NOTE: 1. 2. 3.

En-suite bathrooms and bathtubs were consistently highly sought after. Tenants do want more bathrooms, and overwhelmingly want a bath tub. When rents go up – so does the bathroom count.

BATHROOMS IN RESPONDENT’S CURRENT LIVING SITUATIONS

WHEN ASKED OF ALL RESPONDENTS IF THEY ONLY HAD ONE BATHROOM, THEY WOULD:

100

70 60 50 40 22.7%

30 20

1.4%

How many bathrooms are in your current living situation?

% OF RESPONDENTS

90 75.6%

BATHROOMS

0.3%

70 60

55.9%

Breakout data: When filtering for those paying over $2,500 in rent that responded with a preference: 5% said they require a bathtub and 47% said they prefer a large shower.

50 40 30

22.9%

21.2%

PREFER A SHOWER STALL

DO NOT CARE EITHER WAY

20 10

REQUIRE A BATHTUB

R E S U L T S

What is the ideal way to connect to tenants? IDEALLY, HOW WOULD YOU LIKE YOUR MANAGEMENT COMPANY/LANDLORD TO COMMUNICATE WITH YOU ON ISSUES OR ITEMS AFFECTING YOUR COMMUNITY AND/OR RENTAL UNIT? 1. 2.

Respondents preferred digital communication over other methods. Email at 52% was the most preferred method with the next most popular coming in at 17% for a poster or flyer.

When filtering for age, the desire to receive communications over text message increased from 5% of the overall base to 8% of the 18-25 year olds. When filtering for those 55, email decreases only slightly to 48%.

HOW WOULD RESPONDENTS LIKE THEIR LANDLORDS TO COMMUNICATE WITH THEM? CANADA WIDE

RESPONDENTS 55+

52.4%

43.3%

Poster/Flyer

16.9%

Poster/Flyer

20.9%

Written Letter

10.4%

Written Letter

13.0%

Telephone

4.5%

Telephone

4.4%

Text Message

4.8%

Text Message

1.9%

Monthly Newsletter

4.4%

Monthly Newsletter

5.3%

An App

3.2%

An App

1.2%

Other

2.0%

Other

4.0%

Internet/Social Media Site

1.3%

Internet/Social Media Site

1.1%

HOW ARE SERVICE REQUESTS ACROSS CANADA SUBMITTED?

GIVEN A CHOICE, HOW WOULD RESPONDENTS PREFER TO SUBMIT SERVICE REQUESTS?

In Person

49.1%

Happy With The Way They Submit

26.9%

Online

15.8%

Online

23.6%

E-mail

14.9%

18.2%

Over The Phone

10.9%

In Person

15.0%

Other

8.3%

An App

10.2%

An App

1.0%

Over The Phone

4.9%

Other

1.1%

FOR A TECHNOLOGICALLY SAVVY AND DEMANDING SAMPLE GROUP IT WAS SURPRISING TO FIND THAT:

49%

15%

CURRENTLY SUBMIT THEIR SERVICE REQUESTS IN PERSON

SELECTED IN PERSON WHEN GIVEN THE CHOICE

WHEN YOU FILTER THE RESULTS FOR ONLY 55+, PREFERENCE REQUESTS:

FOR IN-PERSON RISES TO

FOR ONLINE DECLINES TO

23%

13%

ONLINE PREFERENCE:

WHEN YOU LIMIT THE SAMPLE GROUP TO 18-30:

24%

16%

25% WHEN GIVEN THE CHOICE

CURRENTLY USE ONLINE OPTIONS

WOULD LIKE TO SUBMIT ONLINE

18%

13%

WOULD LIKE TO SUBMIT OVER EMAIL

WOULD LIKE TO SUBMIT WITH AN APP

R E S U L T S IT ALL COMES BACK TO PRICING. WHAT WERE THE SIGNING FACTORS (1-10 SCALE)? CANADA WIDE Price

0.4%

0.1%

0.4%

1.8%

5.7%

13.6%

16.9%

59.2%

Location

0.3%

0.0%

0.2%

0.4%

1.7%

2.5%

7.0%

18.8%

28.4%

40.8%

Quality and Look of the Unit

0.2%

0.1%

0.2%

0.6%

1.9%

3.3%

7.8%

18.2%

27.2%

40.5%

Building Quality

0.2%

0.1%

0.5%

1.7%

3.3%

9.9%

22.0%

26.4%

35.8%

Size

0.4%

0.2%

0.4%

0.8%

3.2%

5.6%

13.7%

24.0%

25.5%

26.1%

Management Group

5.5%

1.8%

2.9%

3.8%

12.1%

11.3%

15.4%

16.9%

15.1%

15.3%

Property Owner

7.6%

2.6%

4.0%

5.0%

14.4%

11.1%

14.6%

14.7%

13.3%

12.7%

Price

0.4%

0.0%

0.4%

2.7%

1.9%

6.6%

15.0%

16.2%

56.7%

Location

0.2%

0.0%

0.1%

0.3%

1.4%

2.1%

5.9%

16.8%

24.5%

48.8%

Quality and Look of the Unit

0.2%

0.0%

0.1%

1.6%

1.5%

5.2%

14.4%

26.0%

50.7%

Building Quality

0.1%

0.0%

0.5%

1.2%

1.5%

5.9%

17.8%

26.2%

46.6%

Size

0.4%

0.0%

0.2%

0.7%

3.1%

3.7%

11.4%

22.0%

25.0%

33.4%

Management Group

4.8%

1.2%

1.1%

1.7%

8.4%

6.7%

10.2%

19.7%

20.6%

25.5%

Property Owner

6.9%

1.8%

1.9%

2.9%

10.0%

7.2%

11.4%

16.9%

19.0%

22.0%

55 YEARS AND OLDER

18-30 YEARS OLD Price

0.3%

0.1%

0.3%

0.9%

1.6%

4.6%

12.8%

17.9%

61.2%

Location

0.4%

0.1%

0.2%

0.4%

1.7%

3.2%

8.3%

19.8%

29.9%

36.0%

Quality and Look of the Unit

0.2%

0.3%

0.7%

2.0%

4.9%

9.2%

20.6%

27.4%

34.4%

Building Quality

0.3%

0.1%

0.6%

2.0%

4.5%

13.5%

25.2%

24.8%

28.8%

Size

0.5%

0.3%

0.7%

1.0%

4.1%

7.4%

16.1%

26.0%

23.3%

20.5%

Management Group

5.2%

2.4%

4.5%

5.8%

13.4%

14.8%

18.2%

14.8%

11.2%

9.7%

Property Owner

7.7%

2.8%

5.5%

6.6%

16.2%

13.9%

16.6%

13.1%

9.4%

8.3%

I N SI G H T

PRICE WAS THE MOST PREVELANT FACTOR CANADA WIDE, FOR ALL AGES WITH LOCATION AND QUALITY ALMOST TIED FOR SECOND AND THIRD PLACE.

What were the deciding factors to sign the lease?

S 17

PET OWNERS

WITH DEPENDENTS 0-20 YEARS OLD

Price

0.3%

0.1%

0.4%

1.6%

2.1%

6.1%

13.3%

16.0%

60.1%

Price

0.4%

0.0%

0.4%

2.4%

2.0%

4.5%

11.4%

19.1%

59.8%

Location

0.3%

0.0%

0.3%

0.4%

1.8%

3.6%

8.6%

19.6%

28.0%

37.4%

Location

0.4%

0.0%

0.8%

0.0%

2.0%

3.2%

8.1%

16.2%

25.9%

43.3%

Quality and Look of the Unit

0.3%

0.0%

0.3%

0.4%

1.7%

3.2%

8.4%

17.5%

27.8%

40.5%

Quality and Look of the Unit

0.4%

0.0%

0.4%

2.8%

2.4%

8.9%

15.8%

27.9%

41.3%

Building Quality

0.3%

0.0%

0.3%

1.3%

3.7%

10.6%

23.3%

26.2%

34.3%

Building Quality

0.4%

0.0%

2.4%

2.0%

8.5%

21.5%

24.7%

40.5%

Size

0.3%

0.2%

0.6%

3.2%

5.7%

13.7%

23.6%

25.9%

26.6%

Size

0.0%

2.4%

2.8%

6.9%

21.1%

29.3%

37.4%

Management Group

5.6%

1.8%

3.1%

4.4%

12.5%

11.8%

15.0%

16.9%

14.5%

14.3%

Management Group

7.8%

4.9%

2.0%

2.5%

10.7%

10.2%

12.3%

17.2%

14.8%

17.6%

Property Owner

7.9%

2.1%

4.1%

5.5%

15.1%

11.5%

15.0%

14.1%

12.5%

12.2%

Property Owner

9.4%

4.1%

4.5%

2.5%

13.1%

11.1%

11.9%

14.3%

15.6%

13.5%

RESPONDENTS PAYING $1,800 AND ABOVE IN RENT Price

0.3%

0.1%

0.3%

1.7%

5.4%

13.0%

16.6%

60.7%

Location

0.2%

0.0%

0.2%

0.3%

1.7%

2.9%

7.2%

18.9%

28.5%

40.0%

Quality and Look of the Unit

0.2%

0.1%

0.2%

0.6%

1.7%

3.4%

7.8%

18.3%

27.5%

40.3%

Building Quality

0.2%

0.1%

0.5%

1.5%

3.3%

9.7%

22.5%

26.5%

35.7%

Size

0.4%

0.1%

0.5%

0.8%

3.3%

6.0%

14.6%

24.2%

25.0%

25.2%

Management Group

5.6%

1.8%

2.8%

3.7%

11.9%

11.3%

15.7%

16.8%

15.1%

15.2%

Property Owner

7.6%

2.7%

3.9%

5.0%

14.2%

11.1%

14.7%

14.8%

13.5%

12.5%

Price

0.2%

0.1%

0.4%

1.7%

5.6%

14.0%

17.6%

58.5%

Quality and Look of the Unit

0.3%

0.1%

0.3%

0.6%

1.9%

3.3%

7.8%

19.0%

27.8%

38.9%

Location

0.2%

0.1%

0.3%

1.7%

2.2%

6.7%

18.4%

29.6%

40.6%

Building Quality

0.2%

0.0%

0.1%

0.5%

1.7%

3.3%

10.2%

22.9%

26.7%

34.3%

Size

0.4%

0.2%

0.4%

0.9%

3.3%

5.8%

14.1%

24.1%

26.4%

24.4%

Management Group

5.4%

1.8%

3.1%

3.9%

12.7%

11.4%

15.9%

16.9%

14.9%

14.0%

Property Owner

7.7%

2.7%

4.4%

5.1%

15.3%

11.4%

14.7%

14.9%

12.6%

11.3%

URBAN MARKETS IN CANADA

SUBURBAN MARKETS IN CANADA

C HA RT F INDINGS

PRICE WAS 14% MORE IMPORTANT TO PET OWNERS THAN LOCATION OR QUALITY OF THE UNIT To request a custom report or access to the dashboard that will allow for deeper analysis, please contact us.

Price

0.6%

0.1%

0.2%

0.5%

1.9%

2.0%

5.8%

12.9%

14.9%

61.0%

Location

0.3%

0.0%

0.2%

0.3%

1.3%

3.2%

6.9%

19.4%

25.8%

42.5%

Building Quality

0.3%

0.1%

0.6%

1.6%

2.8%

8.4%

19.7%

26.1%

40.3%

Size

0.6%

0.2%

0.5%

0.2%

2.5%

4.5%

11.6%

24.4%

23.4%

32.2%

Quality and Look of the Unit

0.1%

0.0%

0.1%

0.7%

1.9%

3.2%

7.2%

16.1%

26.1%

44.7%

Management Group

5.9%

1.7%

2.8%

3.7%

10.3%

10.8%

13.7%

17.0%

15.5%

18.6%

Property Owner

7.9%

1.8%

2.4%

4.9%

11.9%

10.6%

13.9%

13.7%

15.3%

17.5%

SECONDARY MARKETS IN CANADA Price

1.1%

0.0%

0.4%

2.7%

1.8%

6.1%

10.5%

14.8%

62.6%

Building Quality

0.2%

0.0%

0.2%

1.8%

4.0%

9.9%

18.2%

24.4%

41.3%

Location

0.7%

0.0%

0.2%

0.9%

2.0%

4.1%

9.9%

21.4%

22.1%

38.7%

Quality and Look of the Unit

0.4%

0.0%

0.2%

0.0%

1.6%

3.6%

8.3%

15.1%

24.3%

46.5%

Size

0.7%

0.0%

0.2%

0.9%

4.3%

6.8%

14.3%

22.0%

20.5%

30.2%

Management Group

5.5%

2.5%

1.6%

2.7%

9.8%

11.0%

13.5%

16.2%

15.8%

21.5%

Property Owner

5.3%

3.2%

3.7%

3.9%

10.7%

9.6%

15.1%

15.5%

16.4%

16.7%

E E P

L R

E E

C S

T E

R N

O C

N E

Importance of a web site for renters to view

RES ULTS

66% OF RESPONDENTS VISITED THE COMPANY WEBSITE AHEAD OF AGREEING TO RENT THEIR UNIT Did visiting the company website influence your rental decision?

YES NO

6 4% 36%

FO C U S O N YO U R W E B P R E S E N C E - I T D O E S M AT T E R !

To request a custom report or access to the dashboard that will allow for deeper analysis, please contact us.

F F

What are essential versus important and how do they combine to create overall preferences?

F E A T U R E

P R E F E R E N C E S

WE ASKED RESPONDANTS TO RANK FEATURES: BATHTUB COLOR CHANGING LED LIGHTING DEVICE CHARGING STATIONS EN-SUITE BATHROOM GARBAGE DISPOSAL GAS STOVE HEATED FLOORS HIGH SPEED INTERNET

C A N A D A

ACCESS IN-UNIT ALARM SYSTEM IN-UNIT SPEAKER/SOUND SYSTEM LOWER ACCESSIBLE KITCHEN/BATHROOM COUNTERS MICROWAVE NON-KEY SECURE ACCESS NON-SMOKING BUILDING

W I D E

PATIO OR BALCONY REFRIGERATOR WITH WATER/ICE DISPENSER SHOWER SUPPORT BAR SMART THERMOSTATS SOUNDPROOF WALLS WALK-IN CLOSET WASHER/DRYER IN UNIT WIDER DOORWAYS

R E S U L T S

TOP 10 FEATURES

BOTTOM 10 FEATURES

Essential Would Not Rent Without

Essential Would Not Rent Without + Important

Not Important

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10.

1. 2. 3.

HIGH SPEED INTERNET ACCESS PATIO OR BALCONY SOUNDPROOF WALLS WASHER/DRYER IN UNIT BATHTUB NON-SMOKING BUILDING GARBAGE DISPOSAL EN-SUITE BATHROOM IN-UNIT ALARM SYSTEM MICROWAVE

SOUNDPROOF WALLS PATIO OR BALCONY HIGH SPEED INTERNET ACCESS WASHER/DRYER IN UNIT BATHTUB GARBAGE DISPOSAL NON-SMOKING BUILDING EN-SUITE BATHROOM WALK-IN CLOSET IN-UNIT ALARM SYSTEM

COLOR CHANGING LED LIGHTING HEATED FLOORS LOWER ACCESSIBLE KITCHEN/BATHROOM COUNTERS 4. REFRIGERATOR + WATER/ICE DISPENSER 5. IN-UNIT SPEAKER/SOUND SYSTEM 6. DEVICE CHARGING STATIONS 7. GAS STOVE 8. SHOWER SUPPORT BAR 9. WIDER DOORWAYS 10. NON-KEY SECURE ACCESS

FEATURES

ESSENTIAL

IMPORTANT

N/A

NOT IMPORTANT

High Speed Internet Access

33.8%

52.2%

4.9%

9.1%

Patio or Balcony

33.4%

53.2%

1.9%

11.5%

Soundproof Walls

27.1%

62%

3.7%

7.2%

Washer/Dryer in Unit

24.3%

55.3%

6.2%

14.2%

Bathtub

25.2%

48.5%

1.8%

24.5%

Non-Smoking Building

23.1%

45.4%

6.6%

24.9%

Garbage Disposal

21.5%

53%

5.3%

20.2%

En-suite Bathroom

13.9%

45.4%

8.8%

31.9%

In-Unit Alarm System

10.5%

45.3%

35.1%

Microwave

9.4%

39.6%

10.7%

40.3%

Walk-in Closet

8.1%

50.3%

6.3%

35.3%

Non-Key Secure Access

6.7%

40.8%

11.4%

41.2%

Gas Stove

5.3%

26.1%

14.9%

53.7%

Refrigerator with Water/Ice Dispenser

5.4%

28.4%

10.2%

56%

Smart Thermostats

5.1%

49.9%

10.1%

34.8%

Shower Support Bar

28.4%

13.3%

53.4%

In-Unit Speaker/Sound System

4.4%

26.9%

12.9%

55.7%

Wider Doorways

33.2%

10.7%

52.2%

Device Charging Stations

2.9%

25.7%

16%

55.3%

Heated Floors

2.8%

18.4%

15.1%

63.7%

Lower Accessible Kitchen/Bathroom Counters

2.6%

19.9%

19.4%

58.1%

Color Changing LED Lighting

1.3%

12.6%

15.3%

70.8%

R E S U L T S ENERGY EFFICIENT AND GREEN FEATURES, AMENITIES AND OVERALL LIFESTYLE CHOICES ARE IN DEMAND. 1. 2.

Smart Thermostat received 50% of respondents indicating they felt it was important. Tri-Slot Garbage also received 55% of respondents reporting it was important and 13% feeling it was essential and they would not rent without. When asked about Eco Friendly / Green Building, 10% of respondents would not rent in a building unless it was rated as such and an additional 29% felt that it was important for them.

SMART THERMOSTATS

Energy Efficient lighting also received 6% of respondents not wanting to rent a unit without. It should be noted that 61% reported that it was important to them, showing a very clear tenant preference. Energy certified building also received 6% vote for essential would not rent without and 56% noting they considered it important.

TRI-SLOT GARBAGE (COMPOST/RECYCLE/GARBAGE)

ESSENTIAL

5.1 0 %

ESSENTIAL

12.2%

I M P O R TA N T

49.9 %

I M P O R TA N T

55.8%

N /A

1 0.1 %

N /A

13%

N O T I M P O R TA N T

34.8%

N O T I M P O R TA N T

19%

ENERGY EFFICIENT LIGHTING

ENERGY CERTIFIED BUILDING (LEED/WELL, ETC.)

ESSENTIAL

6.2%

ESSENTIAL

6 .1 %

I M P O R TA N T

61.2%

I M P O R TA N T

55.6%

N /A

11.5%

N /A

15.3%

N O T I M P O R TA N T

21%

N O T I M P O R TA N T

23%

What eco features are in demand? TOP THREE FACTORS Along with a trend to more technologically advanced properties and management platforms, it seems that tenants are demanding and strongly indicating that they also value green properties and operations. In fact, when you sort the desired amenities by importance and

ENERGY EFFICIENT LIGHTING

TRI-SLOT GARGABE

set aside the essential would not rent without â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Energy Efficient Lighting, Tri-Slot Garbage and Energy Certified Buildings come out at the top three factors that were rated Important.

ENERGY CERTIFIED BUILDINGS

R E S U L T S HOW LONG DID IT TAKE YOU TO FIND YOUR CURRENT LIVING SITUATION? CANADA WIDE 1. 2. 3.

4. 5.

HOW LONG DID IT TAKE RESPONDENTS TO FIND RENTAL? 2.2%

54% took under a month to find their current rental. 10% took between 2-6 months. Those paying over $2,500 saw slightly different results, with 43% taking under a month and 16% taking 2-6 months. 7% took 6-12 months. Those paying between $1,500 and $2,500 were at 2% for 2-12-month search and 52% for under a month. Those under $1,000 in rent saw their search taking less than a month at 57% and 8% between 2-6 months.

2.1%

9.9%

31.6%

< 1 MONTH 1-2 MONTHS 2-6 MONTHS 6-12 MONTHS > 12 MONTHS

54.2%

HOW DID RESPONDENTS FIND THEIR LIVING SITUATION?

UNDER 55 YEARS OLD

OVER 55 YEARS OLD

USED AN ONLINE SERVICE

41%

DIRECTLY FROM BUILDING

34%

DIRECTLY FROM BUILDING

25%

FROM A FRIEND

22%

FROM A FRIEND

22%

USED AN ONLINE SERVICE

16%

How long and what method did renters take to find their living situations?

Using a Realtor to find their rental accounted for 2% of the respondent base. When filtering for only respondents paying over $2,000 a month the number jumps up to 6% and when you factor in those above $3,000 a month the number moves up to 7%.

IF YOU FOUND YOUR CURRENT LIVING SITUATION ON A “ONLINE LISTING SERVICE”, WHICH ONE:

100 90

% OF RESPONDENTS

80 70 60 50

47.3%

40 30 17.2%

13.9% 8.3%

KIJIJI

VIEWIT

CRAIGSLIST PADMAPPER ZUMPER

6.9%

RENT SEEKER

3.3%

2.9%

MLS

GOTTARENT

0.2% ZILLOW

HOW DID YOU FIND YOUR RENTAL (BY CITY AND METHOD)? ONLINE LISTING SERVICE

OTHER

Cambridge/Kitchener/Waterloo

36.3%

Cambridge/Kitchener/Waterloo

11.6%

Edmonton

40.1%

Edmonton

10.5%

Halifax

37.8%

Halifax

6.3%

Kingston

38.2%

Kingston

19.4%

Ottawa

25.0%

Ottawa

10.9%

Toronto

29.0%

Toronto

8.7%

Vancouver

52.2%

Vancouver

5.1%

FRIEND

NEWSPAPER/MAGAZINE AD

Cambridge/Kitchener/Waterloo

18.9%

Cambridge/Kitchener/Waterloo

4.2%

Edmonton

19.0%

Edmonton

4.2%

Halifax

25.3%

Halifax

4.0%

Kingston

18.2%

Kingston

3.0%

Ottawa

35.2%

Ottawa

4.0%

Toronto

23.8%

Toronto

3.1%

Vancouver

12.3%

Vancouver

2.8%

DIRECTLY FROM BUILDING

REAL ESTATE AGENT / BROKER

Cambridge/Kitchener/Waterloo

27.4%

Cambridge/Kitchener/Waterloo

1.6%

Edmonton

25.3%

Edmonton

0.9%

Halifax

24.3%

Halifax

2.3%

Kingston

19.4%

Kingston

1.8%

Ottawa

24.3%

Ottawa

0.7%

Toronto

32.2%

Toronto

3.3%

Vancouver

23.8%

Vancouver

2.0%

HOW LONG TO FIND YOUR RENTAL (BY CITY AND TIME)? < 1 MONTH

> 12 MONTHS

2-6 MONTHS

Calgary

60.7%

Calgary

7.2%

Cambridge/Kitchener/Waterloo

55.3%

Cambridge/Kitchener/Waterloo

11.1%

Halifax

63.4%

Halifax

5.5%

Kingston

52.1%

Kingston

7.9%

Mississauga

52.2%

Mississauga

7.6%

Oakville

52.9%

Oakville

11.5%

Ottawa

54.1%

Ottawa

8.1%

Toronto

49.8%

Toronto

11.5%

Vancouver

55.2%

Vancouver

10.0%

1-2 MONTHS

6-12 MONTHS

Calgary

0.7%

Calgary

29.5%

Calgary

1.9%

Cambridge/Kitchener/Waterloo

5.3%

Cambridge/Kitchener/Waterloo

25.8%

Cambridge/Kitchener/Waterloo

2.6%

Halifax

3.0%

Halifax

26.3%

Halifax

1.8%

Kingston

3.6%

Kingston

32.1%

Kingston

4.2%

Mississauga

4.3%

Mississauga

33.7%

Mississauga

2.2%

Oakville

6.9%

Oakville

24.1%

Oakville

4.6%

Ottawa

1.7%

Ottawa

34.3%

Ottawa

1.7%

Toronto

2.3%

Toronto

34.8%

Toronto

1.6%

Vancouver

2.3%

Vancouver

29.4%

Vancouver

3.1%

I I

R E S U L T S

What is the perfect type of housing for respondents? HOW RENTER PERCEPTIONS SHAPE THEIR FORWARD LOOKING PREFERENCES (CANADA WIDE): If respondents had the choice between types of rentals if rent, size & quality were the same, they would rather:

49.3%

38.8%

11.9%

AN APARTMENT IN A PURPOSE

A CONDOMINIUM

A SUITE IN

BUILT RENTAL BUILDING

UNIT

A HOUSE

77% of respondents were from purpose built rental buildings, yet only 49% of those surveyed chose a purpose-built apartment with another 39% choosing a condominium unit and 12% a house. Over 55 Years showed a preference toward purpose built rental with a 73% response rate, 21% for a condominium and 6% a house.

3. 4.

Under 55 years resulted in 43% for purpose built rental, 44% condominium and 14% house. With dependents 0-15 years old, 45% purpose built apartment, 39% Condo, 16% house

HOW RENTER PERCEPTIONS SHAPE THEIR FORWARD LOOKING PREFERENCES (VANCOUVER VS TORONTO): If respondents had the choice between types of rentals if rent, size & quality were the same, they would rather:

53.1% 40.7%

46%

38.8%

13.4%

8.1%

AN APARTMENT IN A PURPOSE

A CONDOMINIUM

A SUITE IN

BUILT RENTAL BUILDING

UNIT

A HOUSE

TORONTO

VANCOUVER

APARTMENT IN A PURPOSE-BUILT RENTAL Brampton

38%

Calgary

46.7%

Cambridge/Kitchener/Waterloo

52.3%

Edmonton

47.4%

Halifax

57.3%

Hamilton/Burlington

47.2%

Kingston

52.3%

London

55.5%

Mississauga

44.9%

Oakville

59.8%

Other

52.9%

Ottawa

51.5%

Toronto

46%

Vancouver

53.1%

SUITE IN A HOUSE Brampton

12%

Calgary

9.5%

Cambridge/Kitchener/Waterloo

16.1%

Edmonton

Halifax

13.3%

Hamilton/Burlington

15%

Kingston

15.7%

London

10.2%

Mississauga

13.3%

Oakville

12%

Other

11.5%

Ottawa

11.6%

Toronto

13.4%

Vancouver

8.1%

CONDOMINIUM UNIT Brampton

50%

Calgary

43.8%

Cambridge/Kitchener/Waterloo

31.6%

Edmonton

48.6%

Halifax

29.4%

Hamilton/Burlington

37.8%

Kingston

32%

London

34.3%

Mississauga

41.8%

Oakville

28.3%

Other

35.6%

Ottawa

36.9%

Toronto

40.6%

Vancouver

38.8%

J R

How do tenants get to and from work and how long does it take?

R E S U L T S HOW DO YOU COMMUTE TO WORK? (CANADA WIDE)

100 90

While 30% of respondents drive to work, public transit is also highly relied upon, with 27% using it as a commute method.

80 70

When filtering for only other/secondary markets the drive percentage jumps to 40%

60 50

27%

29.6%

17.8% 9.4%

PUBLIC TRANSIT

DRIVE

WALK

WORK FROM HOME

7.5%

5.3%

OTHER

BIKE

1.5%

UBER

TAXI

VANCOUVER VS TORONTO

SUBSTANTIALLY MORE RESIDENTS OF TORONTO USE PUBLIC TRANSIT COMPARED TO VANCOUVER

BIKING TO WORK IS DOUBLE IN VANCOUVER COMPARED TO TORONTO

HOW LONG DOES IT TAKE YOU TO GET TO WORK?

100

60 50

40 30

30.1% 27.5%

20.4% 12% 6.6%

0-10

10-20

20-30

30-45

45-60

FILTERING TO ONLY INCLUDE VANCOUVER AND TORONTO SEES PUBLIC TRANSIT JUMP TO 36% + DRIVING DROP TO 20%

HOW LONG DOES IT TAKE PUBLIC TRANSIT USERS TO GET TO WORK?

% OF RESPONDENTS

3.4% +60

70 60 50 40 30

23.4%

27.2% 20.2%

20 10

13.4%

9.3%

0-10

MINUTES TO WORK (CANADA)

6.4%

10-20

20-30

30-45

45-60

+60

MINUTES TO WORK

Variations by type of commute method: 27% of those that use public transportation take between 10-30 mins, 36% of those that bike and drive to work takes between 10-20 mins

R E S U L T S DO YOU HAVE RENTAL INSURANCE? 1. 2. 3.

70% of respondents had rental insurance. Those under 30 years of age reported that 60% held insurance. Those over 55 years of age reported that 88% of respondents held rental insurance.

NO INSURANCE

Variation by city: Brampton reporting the highest insurance adoption rate and Kingston with the lowest rate.

HAVE INSURANCE

Brampton

13.3%

Brampton

86.7%

Calgary

17.8%

Calgary

82.2%

Cambridge/Kitchener/Waterloo

28.2%

Cambridge/Kitchener/Waterloo

71.8%

Edmonton

14.3%

Edmonton

85.7%

Halifax

26.3%

Halifax

73.7%

Hamilton/Burlington

29.8%

Hamilton/Burlington

70.2%

Kingston

48.4%

Kingston

51.6%

London

42.9%

London

57.1%

Mississauga

34.5%

Mississauga

65.5%

Oakville

19.2%

Oakville

80.8%

Other

38.1%

Other

61.9%

Ottawa

29.0%

Ottawa

71.0%

Toronto

32.0%

Toronto

68.0%

Vancouver

26.7%

Vancouver

73.3%

Victoria

34.9%

Victoria

65.1%

IF YOU ANSWERED NO TO HAVING RENTAL INSURANCE, WHY?

I DIDNâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;T LOOK INTO IT

42 .9 %

IT WAS NOT MANDATORY

26.8%

IT WAS TOO EXPENSIVE

2 0.7%

OTHER

9. 6%

Are tenants buying insurance, if not why?

L L

R E S U L T S Public Transportation ranked as the top Essential factor with a 32% ranking. When you combine Essential and Important to get an idea of preference, near a grocery store ranks the highest on the list.

C A N A D A

Surprisingly, living near places of study, schools, bars and night life were consistently ranked in the bottom three choices.

W I D E

TOP PROXIMITY PREFERENCES

BOTTOM PROXIMITY PREFERENCES

Essential Would Not Rent Without

Essential Would Not Rent Without + Important

Not Important

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

Live Live Live Live Live Live Live Live

Near Near Near Near Near Near Near Near

Public Transit a Grocery Store Your Place of Work Outdoor Space Restaurants Your Children’s Schools Your College/University Bars/Nightlife

Live Live Live Live Live Live Live Live

Near Near Near Near Near Near Near Near

a Grocery Store Public Transit Outdoor Space Your Place of Work Restaurants Bars/Nightlife Your Children’s Schools Your College/University

Live Live Live LIve Live Live Live Live

Near Near Near Near Near Near Near Near

Bars/Nightlife Your College/University Restaurants Your Children’s Schools Outdoor Space Your Place of Work Public Transit a Grocery Store

TO NOTE: When considering only secondary markets, it was interesting that the percentage of those choosing the Essential Would Not Rent Without category was lower than the Important category, compared to the

Urban renters. This indicates that secondary market renters are less selective or specific than their urban counterparts.

WHAT DID THE RESPONDENTS MOST WANT TO LIVE NEAR? CANADA WIDE

ESSENTIAL

IMPORTANT

N/A

NOT IMPORTANT

SECONDARY MARKETS

ESSENTIAL

IMPORTANT

N/A

NOT IMPORTANT

Near a Grocery Store

28.2%

63.7%

Near a Grocery Store

15.3%

69.1%

3.6%

12.1%

Near Bars/Nightlife

3.7%

25.3%

9.1%

62%

Near Bars/Nightlife

1.9%

18.5%

15.7%

63.8%

Near Outdoor Space (Ravines, Parks, etc...)

11.3%

59.9%

6.4%

22.4%

Near Outdoor Space (Ravines, Parks, etc...)

8.7%

54.8%

10.8%

25.7%

Near Public Transit

32.2%

50.1%

3.2%

14.5%

Near Public Transit

14.4%

47.1%

10.6%

27.9%

Near Restaurants

10.4%

56.7%

2.4%

30.5%

Near Restaurants

5.1%

51.10%

6.2%

37.6%

Near Your Children’s Schools

18.9%

48.5%

26.6%

Near Your Children’s

17.%

49.4%

27.5%

Near Your College/ University

5.5%

18.4%

34.6%

41.5%

Near Your College/ University

4.3%

13.1%

38.3%

44.3%

Near Your Place of Work

15.40

55.2%

11.1%

18.3%

Near Your Place of Work

11.9%

50.3%

18.7%

19.1%

URBAN MARKETS

ESSENTIAL

IMPORTANT

N/A

NOT IMPORTANT

SUBURBAN MARKETS

ESSENTIAL

IMPORTANT

N/A

NOT IMPORTANT

Near a Grocery Store

31.4%

61.7%

0.8%

6.1%

Near a Grocery Store

19.6%

70.3%

1.2%

8.8%

Near Bars/Nightlife

4.5%

27.6%

7.9%

60%

Near Bars/Nightlife

0.6%

17.7%

11.5%

70.2%

Near Outdoor Space (Ravines, Parks, etc...)

11.9%

59.9%

22.2%

Near Outdoor Space (Ravines, Parks, etc...)

9.5%

62.4%

22.1%

Near Public Transit

36.7%

49.7%

1.9%

11.6%

Near Public Transit

19.7%

52.9%

5.6%

21.7%

Near Restaurants

11.6%

57.8%

28.6%

Near Restaurants

7.3%

54.2%

2.8%

35.7%

Near Your Children’s Schools

5.7%

17.1%

50.4%

26.8%

Near Your Children’s Schools

7.4%

28%

39.5%

25.2%

Near Your College/ University

6.5%

19.2%

34.2%

40.2%

Near Your College/ University

1.7%

17.1%

35%

46.2%

Near Your Place of Work

16.6%

56%

10%

17.3%

Near Your Place of Work

11.3%

53.9%

12.6%

22.2%

Schools

What factors into geographic choices and what is most in demand?

R E S U L T S WE FOUND THAT TENANTS WOULD LIKE TO BE COMMUNICATED WITH DIGITALLY ON THEIR SERVICE REQUESTS. WHAT ARE THE SATISFACTION LEVELS?

ARE YOU GENERALLY SATISFIED WITH THE OVERALL OUTCOME OF YOUR SERVICE REQUESTS?

ARE YOU KEPT INFORMED ON THE STATUS OF YOUR SERVICE REQUEST?

Keeping in line with what has been reported, 82% of the overall respondent base who answered one way or another to this question reported that they were generally satisfied with the overall outcome of their service request.

64% of those that answered the question with a positive or negative response stated that they were kept informed on the status of their service request leading to the fact that 36% of respondents felt that they were not being kept informed.

HOW WOULD YOU RATE YOUR OVERALL EXPERIENCE WITH SERVICE REQUESTS? 100 90

% OF RESPONDENTS

80 70

60 50

40 30

21.4%

20.7% 15.4%

14.8%

8.8%

HIGHLY SATISFIED

DO YOU TYPICALLY SUBMIT MULTIPLE WORK ORDERS FOR THE SAME ISSUE?

7.2%

3.6%

2.5%

1.8%

3.9%

NOT SATISFIED

ARE YOU SATISFIED WITH THE TIME TO RESOLUTION OF YOUR SERVICE REQUEST?

69.7% 1 8 .7%

11.6%

How happy are tenants with their current service requests?

YES

N/A

Only 21% of those that responded to the question reported that they had to submit a work order multiple times. They still reported a high level of overall satisfaction with their landlord. Those paying over $2,500 in monthly rent reported a 17% rate for submitting a work order multiple times. Those paying $1,200 and under reported 23% multiple submission rate.

77% OF RESPONDENTS WERE SATISFIED WITH TIME TO RESOLUTION OF THEIR SERVICE REQUEST. 41

R E S U L T S DO YOU USE AIRBNB OR SIMILAR SHORT TERM RENTAL SERVICES, SUCH AS VRBO? 1. 2. 3. 4.

Respondents told us that overall 81% of those surveyed did not use short term rental services. Under 30 years old the number dropped slightly to 75% Toronto respondents under 30 reported that 71% did not use these services. 29% of those that responded under 30 from Toronto use a short term rental service

IF YOU ANSWERED YES TO THE PREVIOUS QUESTION, WHEN/WHY DO YOU USE SHORT TERM RENTAL SERVICES? (PLEASE CLICK ALL THAT APPLY)

LEISURE TRAVEL

79.4%

WORK TRAVEL

MY APARTMENT

16 .7%

For those that used a short term rental service, 79% used it for Leisure Travel. When filtering for cities, Brampton was the highest percentage of users assigning the use to their apartment at 30% compared to 2% from Toronto.

3.9%

WOULD YOU PREFER TO LIVE IN A BUILDING WHERE SHORT-TERM RENTAL SERVICES ARE PERMITTED?

4 3.8%

WOULD NOT MATTER

YES BUT WITH REGULATIONS

25% 15.6%

N/A

8 .1%

YES

7.5%

17% OF RESPONDENTS FELT THAT A DESIGNATED UBER DROP OFF AREA WAS IMPORTANT TO THEM

How did respondents see the new sharing economy?

48% of respondents (that indicated a preference one way or another) would prefer to live in a building that did not allow for short term rentals. While only 8% said they would prefer to live in a building that allowed them, 52% said they would not be bothered by being in building allowing for short term rentals. 27% said it did not matter, 17% said with regulations they would be fine and again 8% said they would prefer it. 17% of respondents felt that a designated uber drop off area was important to them.

11% OF RESPONDENTS FELT THAT BIKE SHARING WAS IMPORTANT TO THEM

13% OF RESPONDENTS FELT THAT CAR SHARING WAS IMPORTANT TO THEM

R E S U L T S 1.

With all the online shopping, how are tenants feeling about the process involved in receiving their parcels, does this change by rent or type of rental? 64% of the respondents we surveyed did not have a concierge. Out of those that did have one, 87% felt that their concierge would need to accept packages When filtering for those that pay over $2,000 a month in rent, only 44% reported to not having a concierge and 96% of those that

responded felt their concierge would need to accept packages. When filtering for type of rental and looking at only condo owners, 42% indicated they did not have a concierge, whereas, 92% felt that package delivery was mandatory. When filtering for type of rental and looking only at purpose built rental buildings, 67% indicated they did not have a concierge and 87% of those that responded felt that packages were again mandatory.

IF YOU HAVE A CONCIERGE THAT ACCEPTS PACKAGES, CAN THEY BE PERISHABLE ITEMS?

IF YOU HAVE A CONCIERGE THAT ACCEPTS PACKAGES, CAN THEY BE OVERSIZED?

Food delivery is also a consideration for many tenants. Of those that have a concierge that accepts packages, only 64% of them can have perishable items at the current time. This was consistent when comparing apartment (63%) to condo (67%) renters.

Oversized packages seem to be more common with 79% of respondents indicating their concierge would accept oversized packages. Once again, there was not a huge difference between condo renters (81%) compared to purpose built rental tenants (80%).

IS IT IMPORTANT FOR YOUR CONCIERGE TO STAY LATE AND OPEN EARLY TO RECEIVE PACKAGES?

DO YOU OR WOULD YOU USE PACKAGE LOCKERS?

Turning to preferences, 49% of tenants that chose a preference indicated that it was important for their concierge to stay open late and arrive early to accept packages.

57% of respondents indicated that they would use package lockers. When parceling the data across the cities we reported on, Edmonton was the most accepting at 79% positive response rate and Hamilton/Burlington was the least supportive at 43% positive response rate.

DO YOU FEEL ANY SERVICE OR SYSTEM WOULD NEED TO ACCEPT OVERSIZED AND EXTRA LARGE PACKAGES?

DO YOU FEEL ANY SERVICE OR SYSTEM WOULD NEED TO ACCEPT PERISHABLE ITEMS LIKE GROCERIES ETC.?

64% of those that responded yes or no felt that this would be required.

When looking at the overall market and those that responded yes or no to the question, 47% felt that such a service did not need to account for perishable items.

IF YOU HAVE A CONCIERGE, IS IT IMPORTANT FOR THEM TO ACCEPT PACKAGES? YES

Online shopping is something to watch and monitor as it will continue to impact tenant behavior and property requirements/desirability.

Brampton

50.5%

Brampton

49.5%

Calgary

67.0%

Calgary

33.0%

Cambridge/Kitchener/Waterloo

50.0%

Cambridge/Kitchener/Waterloo

50.0%

Edmonton

78.9%

Edmonton

21.1%

Halifax

68.0%

Halifax

32.0%

Hamilton/Burlington

43.1%

Hamilton/Burlington

56.9%

Kingston

64.5%

Kingston

35.5%

London

48.7%

London

51.3%

Mississauga

59.5%

Mississauga

40.5%

Oakville

50.0%

Oakville

50.0%

Other

50.2%

Other

49.8%

Ottawa

69.0%

Ottawa

31.0%

Toronto

54.3%

Toronto

45.7%

Vancouver

53.2%

Vancouver

46.8%

Victoria

61.6%

Victoria

38.4%

When looking at the respondentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s choice on amenities and features, 44% indicated that a parcel delivery service was important and 7% said it was essential and they would not rent without.

Where are the packages going, who is storing them and keeping them safe and what do older buildings do for tenants?

P P

What changes did respondents anticipate making in the near term?

R E S U L T S IF YOU ARE LOOKING TO PURCHASE A HOME, WHEN DO YOU ANTICIPATE DOING SO?

OUT OF THOSE WHO ANTICIPATED THEY WOULD MOVE, THEY WOULD:

WITHIN 5 YEARS

61%

MOVE INTO A PURPOSE BUILT RENTAL APARTMENT

28%

WITHIN 10 YEARS

19%

MOVE INTO A RENTAL CONDO

19%

BETWEEN 6-12 MONTHS

13%

MOVE CITIES / COUNTRIES

16%

LONGER THAN 10 YEARS

PURCHASE A HOUSE IN THE SAME CITY

14%

WITHIN 6 MONTHS

MOVE INTO A RENTAL HOUSE

13%

PURCHASE A CONDO IN THE SAME CITY

10%

Out of those looking to purchase a home, renters from Calgary were the most inclined, at 44%, to say they were looking to make the jump within 5 years.

IN THE NEXT 12 MONTHS, DO YOU PLAN ON: Staying In The Same Rental Home

64.7%

Moving Into A Purpose Built Rental Apartment

8.3%

IF YOU ARE LOOKING TO CHANGE YOUR RENTAL HOME IN THE NEXT 12 MONTHS, HOW CLOSE TO YOUR CURRENT RESIDENCE WOULD YOU STAY? Stay In The Same Area

47.8% 31.7%

Other

5.8%

Move by 0-10KM

Moving Into A Rental Condo

5.7%

Move by 10-30K

12.2%

Moving Cities/Countries

4.7%

Move + 30KM

8.3%

Purchasing A House In The Same City

4.1%

Moving Into A Rental House

3.8%

Purchasing A Condo In The Same City

2.8%

Location is paramount with 48% staying in the immediate area and an additional 32% staying within 10km of their current residence.

65% anticipated staying in the same rental home over the next 12 months. The variation between Toronto and Vancouver was not notable except in the percentage of those wanting to move into a condo. In Toronto the number was 7% and in Vancouver 10% of respondents would choose a condo if they were going to move.

IF YOU ARE LOOKING TO MOVE IN THE NEXT 12 MONTHS, DO YOU ANTICIPATE YOUR MONTHLY CARRYING COSTS TO: Stay The Same

62.2%

Rise 10%-25%

30.5%

Rise $25-50%

5.9%

Rise + 50%

1.4%

56%

OF THOSE FROM TORONTO ANTICIPATE THEIR CARRYING COSTS TO REMAIN THE SAME

75%

OF THOSE IN HALIFAX EXPECT AN EQUAL EXCHANGE IN THEIR NEW RENTAL

46%

OF THOSE IN MISSISSAUGA ANTICIPATED THEIR NEW RENTAL BEING THE SAME PRICE

STAY THE SAME

RISE 10%-25%

Calgary

70.7%

Calgary

25.3%

Cambridge/Kitchener/ Waterloo

59.1%

Cambridge/Kitchener/ Waterloo

35.8%

Halifax

74.8%

Halifax

22.2%

Kingston

64.8%

Kingston

31.3%

Mississauga

45.7%

Mississauga

42.0%

Ottawa

62.0%

Ottawa

32.8%

Toronto

55.8%

Toronto

35.0%

Vancouver

63.9%

Vancouver

25.3%

RISE 25%-50%

RISE +50%

Calgary

2.9%

Calgary

1.0%

Cambridge/Kitchener/ Waterloo

4.4%

Cambridge/Kitchener/ Waterloo

0.7%

Halifax

2.2%

Halifax

0.9%

Kingston

3.9%

Mississauga

1.2%

Mississauga

11.1%

Ottawa

0.5%

Ottawa

4.8%

Toronto

1.4%

Toronto

7.8%

Vancouver

2.8%

Vancouver

7.9%

Q Q

Can tenants be convinced to stay by upgrades?

R E S U L T S IF YOU ARE PLANNING TO TERMINATE AND MOVE APARTMENTS, COULD YOUR LANDLORD CONVINCE YOU TO STAY?

CH ARTS

50% OF SATISFIED TENANTS SAID THEY WERE NOT PLANNING ON TERMINATING Of those considering terminating, could they be convinced to stay? YES

22%

M AY B E NO

47% 31%

CONSIDERING THE ENTIRE SEGMENT OF THOSE RESPONDING THAT THEY INTEND TO STAY, ONLY 11% OF TENANTS ARE SO DISSATISFIED THAT THEY WILL NOT CONSIDER STAYING.

To request a custom report or access to the dashboard that will allow for deeper analysis, please contact us.

R E S U L T S WHAT ARE YOUR REASONS FOR RENTING VERSUS OWNING? PLEASE PICK YOUR TOP THREE CHOICES 1.

Overwhelming response was Hassle Free Lifestyle at 22% the next closest response was Flexibility to move at 14%. For those over 55 years of age – Hassle Free jumps to 38% and flexibility jumps to 19%. The saving for a down payment category goes from 10% to 1%, which makes sense based on stage of life.

For those under 30 years of age saving for a down payment rises to 14% from 10% when looking at the overall group. Not ready to own also jumps from 12% to 19% when filtering for those under 30 years of age.

CANADA WIDE Hassle Free Lifestyle With Everything Taken Care Of

21.9%

Flexibility Of Being Able To Move Freely

14.3%

I Like The Neighbourhood But Cannot Afford To Purchase A Home Here

14.1%

Not Ready To Own

11.9%

Saving For Down Payment

9.7%

Home Ownership Is Overpriced, I’d Rather Save Money

8.4%

I Do Not Want To Assume The Financial Risk Of Home Ownership

7.5%

I Have Not Found A Home I Want To Purchase

5.5%

Would Not Qualify For A Mortgage

5.0%

I Like The School District But Cannot Afford A House Here

1.8%

55+ YEARS Hassle Free Lifestyle With Everything Taken Care Of

38.4%

Flexibility Of Being Able To Move Freely

18.9%

I Like The Neighbourhood But Cannot Afford To Purchase A Home Here

12.1%

Not Ready To Own

3.1%

Saving For Down Payment

0.9%

Home Ownership Is Overpriced, I’d Rather Save Money

9.8%

I Do Not Want To Assume The Financial Risk Of Home Ownership

10.8%

I Have Not Found A Home I Want To Purchase

1.7%

Would Not Qualify For A Mortgage

4.1%

I Like The School District But Cannot Afford A House Here

0.3%

18-30 YEARS Hassle Free Lifestyle With Everything Taken Care Of

15.7%

Flexibility Of Being Able To Move Freely

14.6%

I Like The Neighbourhood But Cannot Afford To Purchase A Home Here

12.5%

Not Ready To Own

18.6%

Saving For Down Payment

13.7%

Home Ownership Is Overpriced, I’d Rather Save Money

6.2%

I Do Not Want To Assume The Financial Risk Of Home Ownership

6.0%

I Have Not Found A Home I Want To Purchase

6.5%

Would Not Qualify For A Mortgage

4.9%

I Like The School District But Cannot Afford A House Here

1.3%

What were the main reasons respondents are choosing to rent over owning?

R E S U L T S

IF YOU ARE CURRENTLY A TENANT, WHAT IS YOUR LEVEL OF SATISFACTION WITH YOUR LANDLORD/MANAGER/ OWNER?

HOW LIKELY WOULD YOU BE TO RECOMMEND YOUR LANDLORD TO A FRIEND OR COLLEAGUE?

Highly Satisfied

21.0%

Highly Likely

25.8%

13.8%

14.2%

20.4%

18.2%

17.3%

14.0%

7.9%

7.6%

6.6%

4.0%

3.6%

2.4%

1.6%

Not Satisfied

4.0%

Not LIkely

6.0%

Satisfaction stayed relatively the same across geographic regions and for families (those with dependents). Even young families seemed relatively to highly satisfied

Swings in the Highly Likely category by age and city but the overall level of satisfaction from 7-10 remains pretty consistent.

DOES THE UNIT YOU ARE RENTING NOW FULLY MEET YOUR NEEDS? YES

Brampton

53.4%

Brampton

46.6

Calgary

62.6%

Calgary

37.4%

Cambridge/Kitchener/Waterloo

59.0%

Cambridge/Kitchener/Waterloo

41.0%

Edmonton

67.1%

Edmonton

32.9%

Halifax

65.8%

Halifax

34.2%

Hamilton/Burlington

60.6%

Hamilton/Burlington

39.4%

Kingston

66.5%

Kingston

33.5%

London

61.5%

London

38.5%

Mississauga

52.5%

Mississauga

47.5%

Oakville

50.0%

Oakville

50.0%

Other

57.8%

Other

42.2%

Ottawa

62.3%

Ottawa

37.7%

Toronto

51.4%

Toronto

48.6%

Vancouver

54.2%

Vancouver

45.8%

Victoria

42.3%

Victoria

57.7%

IF YOU HAVE LIVED IN YOUR RENTAL HOME FOR MORE THAN ONE YEAR, WHAT ARE THE TOP TWO REASONS THAT YOU HAVE STAYED?

How satisfied are respondents with their property owners/managers/units?

29%

OF RESPONDENTS SAID LOCATION WAS THE MAIN REASON THEY HAVE STAYED

12%

INDICATED VALUE WAS A DISTANT SECOND

57%

43%

SAID YES TO THEIR NEEDS BEING MET

SAID NO TO THEIR NEEDS BEING MET

65%

54%

OF 55-75 YEAR OLDS SAID THAT THEIR UNIT FULLY MET THEIR NEEDS

OF 20-40 YEAR OLDS SAID THAT THEIR UNIT FULLY MET THEIR NEEDS

The Location

29.0%

The Value I Receive For My Rent

11.7%

Quality Property Management

10.6%

The Size

10.5%

I Can Keep Pets

8.5%

Great Rental Home Works Well For Me/Us

7.3%

Great Amenities In Building

4.6%

I Am Not Ready To Move

4.5%

Question Not Applicable/ Recently Moved In

3.8%

Plan To Leave Soon, But Have Not Found A New Home

3.3%

I Have Friends In The Building

3.2%

I Am Not Happy But Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t Have Time/Money To Find New

2.8%

How did respondents feel about technology and their payment preferences?

R E S U L T S HOW WOULD YOU PREFER TO PAY YOUR RENT?

100 90 80 % OF RESPONDENTS

70 60 50

46.7%

40 30 14.9%

12.5%

10.6%

6.7% 1.3%

PREAUTHORIZED DEBIT PAYMENT

E-MAIL BANK TRANSFER

CREDIT CARD

IN PERSON

OTHER

4.8%

3.5%

DEBIT CARD

AN APP

0.3% TEXT

WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO PAY AN EXTRA CONVENIENCE FEE TO USE A CREDIT CARD FOR YOUR RENTAL PAYMENT?

Y ES (OV E RA L L)

12%

YES (+55 YEARS)

Y ES ( 1 8 -25 Y E A R S)

16%

R E S U L T S IS THERE SUFFICIENT PARKING AT YOUR RENTAL? YES

Brampton

88.0%

Brampton

12.0%

Calgary

84.4%

Calgary

15.6%

Cambridge/Kitchener/Waterloo

74.2%

Cambridge/Kitchener/Waterloo

25.8%

Edmonton

85.2%

Edmonton

14.8%

Halifax

90.7%

Halifax

9.3%

Hamilton/Burlington

88.0%

Hamilton/Burlington

12.0%

Kingston

91.5%

Kingston

8.5%

London

87.2%

London

12.8%

Mississauga

90.2%

Mississauga

9.8%

Oakville

87.4%

Oakville

12.6%

Other

81.8%

Other

18.2%

Ottawa

89.6%

Ottawa

10.4%

Toronto

86.3%

Toronto

13.7%

Vancouver

81.1%

Vancouver

18.9%

Victoria

89.2%

Victoria

10.8%

PARKING LOT WAS THE NUMBER ONE ESSENTIAL WOULD NOT RENT WITHOUT AMENITY CHOICE FOR RESPONDENTS RIGHT ACROSS CANADA

86% OF RESPONDENTS FELT THAT THERE WAS SUFFICIENT PARKING AT THEIR PROPERTY

HOW MUCH EXTRA DO YOU PAY FOR PARKING? CANADA WIDE

SECONDARY MARKETS

Included In Rent

17.0%

Included In Rent

39.2%

Under $50

9.6%

Under $50

18.7%

Don’t Have a Car

31.2%

Don’t Have a Car

18.5%

$50-$75

16.9%

$50-$75

13.3%

$75-$100

13.0%

$75-$100

6.4%

$100-$150

10.7%

$100-$150

3.2%

Over $150

1.6%

Over $150

0.8%

SUBURBAN MARKETS

URBAN MARKETS

Included In Rent

27.1%

Included In Rent

12.6%

Under $50

14.3%

Under $50

7.6%

Don’t Have a Car

14.5%

Don’t Have a Car

36.2%

$50-$75

31.2%

$50-$75

14.0%

$75-$100

8.0%

$75-$100

14.7%

$100-$150

4.2%

$100-$150

12.9%

Over $150

0.7%

Over $150

1.9%

INCLUDED PARKING

PERCENTAGE OF RESPONDENTS THAT HAVE PARKING INCLUDED IN THEIR RENT JUMPS FROM 17% CANADA WIDE TO 39% IN SECONDARY MARKETS. FOR SUBURBAN RESPONDENTS, THE NUMBER DROPS TO 27%. FOR URBAN RESPONDENTS, THE NUMBER DROPS TO 13%.

IS THERE SUFFICIENT GUEST PARKING?

55%

Parking remains in demand for all

OF RESPONDENTS FELT THERE WAS SUFFICIENT GUEST PARKING AT THEIR RENTALS

VICTORIA RESPONDENTS ARE THE MOST SATISFIED

EDMONTON RESPONDENTS ARE THE LEAST SATISFIED 57

R E S U L T S DOES YOUR BUILDING HAVE AN ONLINE COMMUNITY PORTAL THAT ALLOWS YOU TO PLAN AND ATTEND SOCIAL EVENTS AND NETWORK WITH RESIDENTS?

FOR RESPONDENTS PAYING OVER $2,500, THE NUMBER OF THOSE WHO DO NOT HAVE A COMMUNITY PORTAL DECREASES TO 67%.

74%

WHEN FILTERING FOR THOSE FROM SECONDARY MARKETS, THE POSITIVE RESPONSE WAS ONLY 15% SHOWING THAT SMALLER MARKETS HAVE NOT YET IMPLEMENTED ONLINE PORTALS THE SAME WAY URBAN COMMUNITIES HAVE.

OF OVERALL RESPONDENTS REPORTED TO NOT HAVING A COMMUNITY PORTAL

URBAN COMMUNITIES HAD A 28% POSITIVE RESPONSE RATE.

31%

47%

OF THOSE WHO HAVE AN ONLINE COMMUNITY USE THE PORTAL

OF RESPONDENTS WITHOUT A COMMUNITY PORTAL (ALL MARKETS AND AGE GROUPS) WOULD LIKE ONE

IS IT IMPORTANT FOR YOU TO ENGAGE WITH YOUR RENTAL COMMUNITY OVER THE FOLLOWING SERVICES?

100 90

% OF RESPONDENTS

80 70

55.3%

40 30

14.7%

13.1%

NOT IMPORTANT

FACEBOOK

COMMUNITY BLOG

3.7%

2.8%

2.6%

2.4%

1.9%

INSTAGRAM

TWITTER

GOOGLE+

OTHER

YOUTUBE

1% PINTEREST

What do tenants think about online portals, virtual communities and networking platforms?

R E S U L T S WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO PAY MORE RENT IF ANY OF THE FOLLOWING WERE UPGRADED IN YOUR CURRENT RENTAL HOME?

FULL RENOVATED BATHROOM

NEW KITCHEN / BATHROOM FIXTURES

Toronto

16.9%

Toronto

9.9%

Vancouver

18.4%

Vancouver

20.0%

DISHWASHER

NEW LIGHTING & FIXTURES

Toronto

15.8%

Toronto

7.9%

Vancouver

11.5%

Vancouver

7.0%

HARDWOOD FLOORS

KEYPAD / BLUETOOTH DOOR UNLOCK

Toronto

12.7%

Toronto

6.6%

Vancouver

8.8%

Vancouver

7.2%

STAINLESS STEEL APPLIANCES

BACKSPLASH IN KITCHEN

Toronto

12.2%

Toronto

6.8%

Vancouver

10.6%

Vancouver

4.5%

NEW CABINETS/CUPBOARDS

What were tenants willing to pay more rent for?

Toronto

11.2%

Vancouver

12.1%

16.4%

1 4.9 %

12.3%

FULLY RENOVATED BATHROOM

DISHWASHER

HARDWOOD FLOOR

OV E R 55 AG E G R O UP

1 1 .7%

STAINLESS STEEL APPLIANCES

NEW CABINETS / CUPBOARDS

1 1 .1 % NEW KITCHEN / BATHROOM FIXTURES

INDICATED THEY WOULD BE INCLINED TO PAY MORE FOR NEW CABINETS IN THE KITCHEN WH EN LO O K I N G AT TH E R ESP O N SES OF VANCO UV E R OV E R TO R O N TO

7. 9 %

7. 2 %

6 .9 %

NEW LIGHTING & FIXTURES

KEYPAD / BLUETOOTH DOOR UNLOCK

BACKSPLASH IN KITCHEN

HARDWOOD FLOORS ARE QUITE DIFFERENT IN TERMS OF IMPORTANCE LEVEL BETWEEN THE TWO CITIES, WITH VANCOUVER RENTERS WILLING TO PAY MORE FOR THAT UPGRADE COMPARED TO TORONTO RENTERS.

R E S U L T S IS LIVING IN A NON-SMOKING BUILDING IMPORTANT TO YOU?

72% OF TOTAL RESPONDENTS SAID THAT LIVING IN A NON-SMOKING BUILDING WAS IMPORTANT TO THEM.

IS LIVING IN A NON-SMOKING BUILDING IMPORTANT TO YOU? YES

Brampton

75.1%

Brampton

24.9%

Calgary

71.7%

Calgary

28.3%

Cambridge/Kitchener/Waterloo

70.2%

Cambridge/Kitchener/Waterloo

29.8%

Edmonton

76.5%

Edmonton

23.5%

Halifax

67.6%

Halifax

32.4%

Hamilton/Burlington

62.3%

Hamilton/Burlington

37.7%

Kingston

78.0%

Kingston

22.0%

London

60.2%

London

39.8%

Mississauga

75.0%

Mississauga

25.0%

Oakville

75.6%

Oakville

24.4%

Other

69.5%

Other

30.5%

Ottawa

70.1%

Ottawa

29.9%

Toronto

72.6%

Toronto

27.4%

Vancouver

79.9%

Vancouver

20.1%

Victoria

75.9%

Victoria

24.1%

WOULD IT BOTHER YOU TO HAVE YOUR NEIGHBOUR OR A TENANT IN YOUR BUILDING SMOKE MEDICAL MARIJUANA IN THEIR UNIT OR COMMON SPACE?

55% OF RESPONDENTS FELT THAT IT WOULD BOTHER THEM

68%

48%

OF RESPONDENTS FROM BRAMPTON SAID YES.

OF RESPONDENTS FROM HAMILTON/BURLINGTON SAID NO.

THIS WAS THE HIGHEST PERCENTAGE OF A YES VOTE WHEN VIEWED BY CITY.

THIS WAS THE HIGHEST PERCENTAGE OF A NO VOTE WHEN VIEWED BY CITY.

What are the opinions on smoking in 2017? 63

R E S U L T S HAVE YOU HAD PESTS IN YOUR UNIT, FOR EXAMPLE, FLEAS, TICKS, RODENTS OR BED BUGS?

78%

HAVE NOT HAD PESTS Brampton

66.7%

Calgary

90.2%

Cambridge/Kitchener/Waterloo

85.1%

Edmonton

91.1%

Halifax

73.7%

Hamilton/Burlington

65.7%

Kingston

77.2%

London

75.3%

Mississauga

65.1%

Oakville

66.3%

Other

84.2%

Ottawa

78.6%

Toronto

71.8%

Vancouver

86.7%

Victoria

76.2%

OF RESPONDENTS OVERALL HAVE HAD NO PEST ISSUES

FILTERING FOR ONLY SECONDARY/OTHER MARKETS INCREASES THE NUMBER TO

84%

HAVE YOU HAD PESTS IN THE LAST 12-24 MONTHS?

HAD PESTS IN THE LAST 12 MONTHS

HAD PESTS IN THE LAST 24 MONTHS

Brampton

25.2%

Brampton

8.1%

Calgary

8.3%

Calgary

1.5%

Cambridge/Kitchener/Waterloo

11.2%

Cambridge/Kitchener/Waterloo

3.7%

Edmonton

8.2%

Edmonton

0.6%

Halifax

22.3%

Halifax

4.0%

Hamilton/Burlington

27.5%

Hamilton/Burlington

6.8%

Kingston

17.3%

Kingston

5.6%

London

19.4%

London

5.3%

Mississauga

24.4%

Mississauga

10.5%

Oakville

22.5%

Oakville

11.3%

Other

11.5%

Other

4.3%

Ottawa

17.4%

Ottawa

4.0%

Toronto

22.0%

Toronto

6.2%

Vancouver

10.1%

Vancouver

3.2%

Victoria

17.9%

Victoria

6.0%

How did pests factor into respondents rentals in 2017?

What did respondents with dependents between 0-20 years of age answer? What are families telling us?

R E S U L T S DOES THE UNIT YOU ARE RENTING FULLY MEET YOUR NEEDS?

DO YOU HAVE RENTAL INSURANCE?

67%

YES NO

33%

46% 5 4%

HOW MANY CARS DO FAMLIES OWN?

X 32%

53%

15%

IF YOU RENTED YOUR HOME FOR MORE THAN A YEAR, WHAT ARE THE TOP TWO REASONS YOU STAYED?

WHAT IS YOUR CURRENT RENT?

The Location

28.0%

$1,201 - $1,500

36.9%

The Value I Receive For My Rent

12.2%

$1,501 - $1,800

16.4%

Quality Property Management

8.7%

$1,801 - $2,000

4.5%

The Size

10.6%

$1,001 - $1,200

12.3%

I Can Keep Pets

5.5%

$2,001 - $2,200

4.9%

Great Rental Home Works Well For Me/Us

7.5%

$2,201 - $2,500

4.5%

Great Amenities In Building

3.4%

$501 - $1,000

16.0%

I Am Not Ready To Move

4.8%

$2,501 - $3,000

1.9%

Question Not Applicable/ Recently Moved In

5.0%

Under $500

1.1%

Plan To Leave Soon, But Have Not Found A New Home

5.3%

$3,001 - $3,500

0.4%

I Have Friends In The Building

4.3%

$3,501 - $4,000

0.0%

I Am Not Happy But Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t Have Time/Money To Find New

4.6%

$4,501+

1.1%

IN THE NEXT 12 MONTHS DO YOU PLAN ON?

HOW LIKELY ARE YOU TO RECOMMEND YOUR LANDLORD TO A FRIEND?

Staying In The Same Rental Home

55.4%

Moving Into A Purpose Built Rental Apartment

7.2%

Other

3.6%

Highly Likely

22.8%

Moving Into A Rental Condo

5.8%

15.2%

Moving Cities/Countries

5.4%

12.8%

Purchasing A House In The Same City

9.4%

17.2%

Moving Into A Rental House

10.5%

7.2%

Purchasing A Condo In The Same City

2.5%

7.9%

5.5%

4.1%

0.7%

Not Likely

6.6%

HOW DID YOU FIND YOUR RENTAL? Online Listing Service

38.4%

Directly From Building

27.2%

Friend

26.1%

Other

3.3%

Newspaper/Magazine Ad

2.2%

Real Estate Agent / Broker

2.9%

A P P E N D I X

Full list of survey questions (2017). Please note not all questions are included in this report.

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

7. 8. 9. 10. 11.

12.

13.

14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20.

21.

22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31.

Do you rent or own? Please indicate your gender? Please indicate your age? Which city do you live in? Please provide your province If you are currently a tenant, what is your level of satisfaction with your landlord/ manager/owner? How likely would you be to recommend your landlord to a friend or colleague? How can your landlord improve your customer experience? Does the unit you are renting now fully meet your needs? If you answered NO to the question above, what is the main reason why? If you were looking for a new rental home today, if the rent, quality and location were equivalent, would you prefer to rent? If you have lived in your rental home for more than one year, what are the top two reasons that you have stayed? If you are planning to terminate and move apartments, could your landlord convince you to stay? If you would consider staying, what would they need to do? Please provide the name of your landlord/ manager/owner. Please provide your address Please provide your postal code How did you find this survey? Are you currently employed full time? If you answered YES to the previous question, please categorize your employment type? If you answered NO to the previous question, please categorize your current status? Are you a pet owner? If you answered yes to owning a pet, do you own a: What is your marital status? In the past 5 years has your household income: Have you previously owned a home? What is your living arrangement? How many people live in your household? Do you have roommates that you rent share with? If you have roommates, how many do you have? How many dependents do you have?

32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37.

38. 39. 40. 41. 42.

43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49.

50.

51. 52. 53.

If you have dependent(s), what are their age groups (select all that apply)? What is your household * income range? How many cars/motorcycles do you currently own? What kind of rental do you live in? How did you find your current living situation? If you found your current living situation on a “Online Listing Service”, please let us know which one: How long did it take you to find your current living situation? How many bedrooms are in your current living situation? How many bathrooms are in your current living situation? If you were to rent a unit with only one bathroom, would you: Would you be willing to pay more rent, if any of the following were upgraded in your current rental home: (Please click all that apply) How long have you rented your current living situation? What is your current rent? Is there sufficient parking at your rental? How much extra do you pay for parking? Is there sufficient guest parking? What are your reasons for renting versus owning? Please pick your top three choices If you are looking to change your rental home in the next 12 months, how close to your current residence would you stay? If you are looking to move in the next 12 months, do you anticipate your monthly carrying costs to: In the next 12 months, do you plan on: If you are looking to purchase a home, when do you anticipate doing so? How important are the following amenities to you? • 24 Hour Concierge • Additional Storage Space outside of Unit • BBQ’s for Tenants to Use • Bike Sharing • Bike Storage • Building Events and Socials • Business Center • Car Sharing • Common Lounge • Community BBQ/Grill

• •

54.

55.

56.

Conference Rooms / Meeting Space Daily, Weekly, Monthly housekeeping • Daycare in Building • Daytime Concierge • Designated Uber Drop Off & Pick Up Area • Designated Outdoor Dog Area • Dog Grooming • Dog Treats in Lobby • Dog Walking • Dog Washing Station • Dry Cleaning Pickup/Delivery • Energy Efficient Lighting • Energy Certified Building (LEED, Well Building Standard etc.) • Fitness Classes • Fitness Facilities • Games Room • Indoor Common Area • Outdoor Common Area • Outdoor Playground • Parcel Delivery Service • Parking Lot • Personal Shopping Services • Personal Trainer Available to Tenants • Private Bathroom in Co-sharing • Living Space • Sauna/Spa • Security Guard and/or System • Toddler/Family Room • Tri-slot Garbage (Compost/Recycle/ Garbage) • Valet Parking Would you be willing to pay more for a unit if it had additional amenities that your present rental home does not? Please let us know how important the following items are for you when looking for a unit: • Live Near a Grocery Store • Live Near Restaurants • Live Near Your Place of Work • Live Near Public Transit • Live Near Bars/Nightlife • Live Near Your College/University • Live Near Your Children’s Schools • Live Near Outdoor Space (Ravines, Parks, etc...) Please tell us about your rental features preferences: • Bathtub • Color Changing LED • Lighting

57.

58.

59.

60.

61.

62.

63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68.

• Device Charging • Stations • En-suite Bathroom • Garbage Disposal • Gas Stove • Heated Floors • High Speed Internet Access • In-Unit Alarm System • In-Unit Speaker/Sound System • Lower Accessible • Kitchen/Bathroom Counters • Microwave • Non-Key Secure Access • Non-Smoking Building • Patio or Balcony • Refrigerator with Water/Ice Dispenser • Shower Support Bar • Smart Thermostats • Soundproof Walls • Walk-in Closet • Washer/Dryer in Unit • Wider Doorways Have you had pests in your unit during the: (for example, fleas, ticks, * rodents, bed bugs) Does your building have an online community portal that allows you to plan and attend social events and network with residents? If your building DOES have an online community portal, do you use it? (Select N/A if the question does not apply) If your building DOES NOT have an online community portal, would you like one? (Select N/A if the question does not apply) Is it important for you to engage with your rental community over the following services? Please click all that apply Ideally, how would you like your management company / landlord to communicate with you on issues or items affecting your community and/or rental unit? In renting your latest unit, did you visit the company website ahead of time? If you visited the company’s web sites, did it influence your decision? Do you currently submit your service requests by: If you had your choice, would you rather submit a service request by: How would you rate your overall experience with service requests? Do you typically submit multiple work orders for the same issue?

69. 70. 71. 72. 73.

74. 75. 76. 77.

78. 79. 80.

81. 82. 83. 84.

85. 86. 87. 88. 89.

90.

91. 92.

Are you satisfied with the time to resolution of your service request? Are you generally satisfied with the overall outcome of your service requests? Are you kept informed on the status of your service request? Would you prefer to pay your rent with: Would you be willing to pay an extra convenience fee to use a credit card for your rental payment? How do you commute to work? (Please select all that apply) How long does it take you to get to work? Do you have rental insurance? If you answered YES to having rental insurance, with which company do you insure? If you answered NO to having rental insurance, why? Do you use Airbnb or similar short term rental services, such as VRBO? If you answered YES to the previous question, when/why do you use short term rental services? (Please click all that apply) Which short term rental service(s) do you currently use? Would you prefer to live in a building where short-term rental services are permitted? Is living in a non-smoking building important to you? Would it bother you to have your neighbour or a tenant in your building smoke medical marijuana in their unit or common space? If you have a concierge, is it important for them to accept packages? If you have a concierge that accepts packages, can they be perishable items? If you have a concierge that accepts packages, can they be oversized? Is it important for your concierge to stay late and open early to receive packages?] How much would you pay per month, in additional fees, for the ability to retrieve your package(s) outside of traditional 9-5 hours? Do you or would you use package lockers? (Package lockers are self-serve boxes for on-line shopping deliveries located in your lobby that you have access to without the need for a concierge) How much do you or would you pay on a monthly basis for package lockers? Would you use a package delivery service

93.

94.

95.

96.

that manages all your packages, sends you a message letting you know they have arrived at the depot and then delivers them to your door at a convenient time for you? How much would you pay on a monthly basis for this type of package management service? Do you feel any service or system would need to accept oversized and extra large packages? Do you feel any service or system would need to accept perishable items like groceries etc.? What are the most important factors when you are deciding where to sign a lease? • Price • Size • Location • Building Quality • Management Group • Property Owner • Quality and Look of the Unit

I NT E RACT I V E DASHBOAR D

INTERESTED IN PURCHASING THE DASHBOARD?

CONTACT

The Dashboard is an interactive tool that allows you and your team to conduct simple and complex analysis of the 2017 survey findings. SIMPLE ANALYSIS

Filter by age, income, rental amount, number of dependants. COMPLEX ANALYSIS

Filter by multiple demographic criteria in addition to any of the survey question responses. An example would be to filter by those that have dependants between the ages of 0-20 years old that pay over $1,800 in rent, have pets and also ranked parking lots as essential would not rent without. There are literally millions of combinations of questions that you can ask of the Dashboard, allowing you to define your ideal tenant and then see how they responded to a survey question. You will have access to permanently download your work product as an image, PDF or numerically.

ONE USER PER COMPANY WILL BE INCLUDED IN THE 1ST LICENSE FEE. ADDITIONAL LICENSEES CAN BE PURCHASED

SHOULD YOU WISH TO DISCUSS YOUR ACCESS OR GAIN ACCESS TO THE DIGITAL DASHBOARD BY PURCHASING A LICENSE PLEASE CONTACT: SARAH SEGAL, DIRECTOR INFORMA CANADA SARAH.SEGAL@INFORMA.COM

FOR A SUBSEQUENT FEE. LICENSES TO ACCESS THE 2017 DIGITAL DASHBOARD WILL BE VALID UNTIL MAY 2018.

This document is confidential and private. Distribution is restricted. It may not be reproduced, copied or replicated in any form without the express and written authorization of Informa Canada. Informa Canada has not made any independent investigation, verification or audit of any of the information contained in this document. Neither Informa Canada nor any third parties makes any representations or warranties, express or implied, regarding the accuracy, timeliness, completeness or suitability of the information contained in this document. Your use of such information is entirely at your own risk, for which neither Informa Canada nor any third party is liable.â&#x20AC;?

Presented by:

Gold sponsors:

Supported by:

Photography courtesy of unsplash.com Design & layout by emmapatricia.com